<p>When I think of my home country, one way they are able to send at least some poor kids to elite colleges is to catch the bright poor kids before they go into high school.
The government administers a tough country-wide exam before high school to kids nominated by their elementary schools (usually the top students but schools are also known to nominate slackers who they think might be gifted). The top scorers based on geography are offered a need-based high school scholarship at special govt-run STEM high schools which are mainly boarding schools (there are only a handful in the country).
Typically the kids who graduate from those high schools are able to compete for merit scholarships at the elite schools (including elite US schools - some have gone to MIT & the Ivies).
My home country is so much smaller than the USA, and it’s hard to see how something like that would scale.
I guess it’s a bit like the magnet school set-up here.</p>
<p>@becca17: I daresay that any kid in Podunkville, IN has heard of IU as well, but point taken. </p>
<p>BTW, there are few better options for engineering than PU and few bestter options for business than IU.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That probably wasn’t the best example, but its one I’m aware of directly. In the case of the student who made that choice, the Ivy alternative might have been too big a distance in both geography and culture. It was about four hours or so from his home vs eight to the Ivy. There might also have been some cost differences, although I’m not sure of those details. In any case, its in a part of the country that’s more like where he came from than the Ivy would be.</p>
<p>@OldNassau: It’s not just the students who refuse to lift their eyes to see the opportunities out there; often it’s the parents. Back in the day, I was accepted to a couple of pretty decent schools, in addition to my large state flagship university; but my parents were divorced, and my father – who was responsible for paying for college – didn’t want to pay for anything except the large state flagship university, because (1) it was cheaper than the other options – even after scholarships – and (2) it’s where he went to college. And if it was good enough for him, then by God it was good enough for me! Well, I ended up at the large state flagship university, where I did just fine; so maybe Dad was on to something!</p>
<p>A couple of months ago I read an article in the New York Times Sunday Magazine where the author was talking about how he ended up going to school at Notre Dame. He had told his father about all the different schools that he had applied to, and how much he wanted to go to one of them; his father, who had attended Notre Dame, told him,“You can apply wherever you want; but I’m sending my checks to Notre Dame.”</p>
<p>My point is that sometimes it’s not the kids, and not the schools, that are the issue; it’s the other, significant players in the game – the parents, especially if there are important financial decisions that have to be made as part of the college selection process (such as, who is writing the checks). And their input – whether rationally or irrationally based – cannot be ignored.</p>
<p>“It’s not their job to enlighten low information 40-something parents and their naive offspring.”</p>
<p>It depends whom you ask. HYP think that it is their job, and they put a fair bit of money into the project. They do this somewhat for the families’ benefit and largely for their own. They think it’s part of their mission to enroll some of the rural valedictorians we’re talking about, and it can’t do that if they don’t apply.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>So, what does any of that have to do with my post? (Hint: the well-travelled wealthy also attend college close to home. The vast majority of students at NESCAC schools, where full pay is the norm, are within 4 hours’ drive of home.)</p>
<p>@becca17:</p>
<p>LOL. <em>ouch</em></p>
<p>BTW, IU’s undergrad b-school, Kelley, is as much a Wall Street target for recruiting as many Ivies/equivalents (granted, for a good shot, you have to get in to their IB Workshop). So in that aspect, IU is as good a path to the upper-middle class as the Ivies.</p>
<p>“But they’re not flushing millions down the drain trying to convince hard-headed parents around the country, I assure you.”</p>
<p>What do you mean, you assure me? I’ve been involved in these programs for my alma mater. I have met the admissions representatives they send nationwide (I’m about 1000 miles from campus). They pay minority undergrads to spend hours on the phone every week reaching out to kids all around the country. All of this costs money. Your assurances don’t trump my direct observation.</p>
<p>The most selective colleges do spend a lot of time searching for the “diamonds in the rough.” But they can’t be too rough, and I think that’s the problem.</p>
<p>@oldmom4896: My high school actually had a single lunch period where students were allowed to eat anywhere in the building. I brought my lunch from home so I never once set foot in the cafeteria. But I can say right now that a nerd table would not have discussed something like Doctor Who, never elite colleges. By virtue of being the highest achieving student at my school, I more or less was the nerd king (even if I don’t quite fit the stereotype). Yet until the second half of my junior year, I didn’t know about elite colleges, and neither did anyone else.</p>
<p>Sometimes, the smartest kid at our school will apply to Vanderbilt. Sometimes. The GCs said that last year was unusual in that we had four applications; in the past, the number had never exceeded two–and usually it was one or zero. Beyond Vanderbilt, nothing exists.</p>
<p>@gandalf78: You can imagine that I was met with severe resistance when I decided to apply to Ivy League schools. My family actively discouraged it. For example, my dad told me I was insane and that if I had any sense in me I would go to state school. My grandfather, whom I live with, told me at least once a week that he didn’t want me going to school outside of Tennessee. When I got my likely letter from UPenn, he wasn’t excited; he was upset. Recurring themes were that state school should be good enough for anybody and that the Ivy League didn’t offer a better education–just snobby yankees. Grandpa would turn up his nose and mock me in his best impression of a northern accent whenever I mentioned a school north of the Mason-Dixon line.</p>
<p>The only reason I’m able to go to Princeton is that my folks are poor enough that I get a full ride. If they had been wealthy enough that Princeton expected them to contribute, I’d be out of luck. They weren’t giving me a dime. I had to save up my own money to apply to schools–no support there, of course–and I’ve even had to buy my own plane tickets.</p>
<p>@becca17: You’re VERY right that regional schools have an interest in keeping kids there. It’s not all bad; a regional college beats no college any day. But it can certainly keep high-achievers in the dark. My HS had an enrichment club made up mostly of gifted students, and once a month we would go learn about something in town. Some months it was a factory. One month it was our community college. You would not believe how heavily they pitched our two-year college to these gifted kids. It made me really angry. The pitch works, too. A smart kid who was a grade ahead of me studied there last year when he could have gotten a full scholarship at a four-year college easily.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>becca, colleges are businesses like anything else. Why would a school spend money to encourage students to go somewhere else? And sorry, but Hanna has a lot more credibility on this subject than you do. Let me guess–still in high school?</p>
<p>It is refreshing to read about colleges other than the Ivies deluding people about the value of the campus experience.</p>
<p>@becca17: “The kid was too oblivious to recognize how great ND is and that 25% of the incoming class is reserved for legacies. If my parents were Notre Dame alums I pray to God I wouldn’t have been naive or bratty enough to tell them no.”</p>
<p>I am not presuming to know what the dynamic between the student (now an alumnus of Notre Dame, according to the article) and his father was, nor that one viewpoint was better than another; my point about this anecdote was how, no matter what a college-bound child may decide or want, the parents have significant influence into these decisions, rightly or wrongly. </p>
<p>I will do my best to get a reference or citation to the NY Times Sunday Magazine article for you.</p>
<p>The recent study is interesting, and makes a nice complenent to Hoxby’s and Avery’s (<a href=“The Missing "One-Offs": The Hidden Supply of High-Achieving, Low Income Students | NBER”>http://www.nber.org/papers/w18586</a>) or the seminal work of Carnevale and Rose <a href=“http://www.tcf.org/assets/downloads/tcf-carnrose.pdf”>A 2023 Plan for Economic Equity and Progress. </p>
<p>The magnitude of the problem is measured when little improvement is shown despite the (wonderful) work of Posse and Questbridge. The article pointed to some of their work --although they forgot to mention the larger impact of the Gates Millenium program. </p>
<p>The location and lack of financial aid does indeed play a rolem but there are other compelling elements. While more money for lower income students would be nice, there are a lot of resources for competitive students. The biggest handicap remains a GLARING lack of constructive infornation about the available programs and a GLARING need to make the students aware of the possibulities MUCH earlier in their HS career. </p>
<p>In so many words, selective schools do what they can do in reaching out and present their schools. The information, however, appears to planting seeds in the arid Sahara, as it falls on deaf ears in the guidance offices at your typical disadvantaged high school. To the defense of the GC, one should recognize that their activities are NOT confined to college guidance as plenty of other tasks are sent their way. </p>
<p>The biggest issue is that it is NOT enough to collect the information and distribute it to generations of students. Posting a bunch of scholarships “terms” on the board or distributing pamphlets in NOT enough. A clear path to help students apply SUCCESSFULLY is critical. Telling Suzy or Adrian that Questbridge has “some” program is not enough. Making sure Suzy gets into her preparation for the SAT well before her Junior year is needed, and so are “classes” in presenting an application and writing essays. </p>
<p>The fact that students end up attending a local school is due to GC following a path of least resistance. The egg and chicken story at its best. </p>
<p>On an anedoctal basis, I have seen how positive changes can (and should) take place. A small (and not wealthy) religious high school has seen a TEN FOLD increase in successful applications at highly selective schools by recognizing that “college preparatory” was part of their motto and mission. They did realize that paying attention to the vast world beyond their usual destination (think UT Austin or Notre Dame) was warranted, and that a dedicated program to prepare for SELECTIVE college applications might pay dividends. Ten years later, the school is arguably the most successful in landing Gates Millennium and Questbridge scholarships. It did not happen overnight but the results are simply fantastic. Freshmen see the tangible results and understand that landing in the top percentiles DOES make a difference, and that to get there one will need to “beat” 80 to 90 percent of the peers. Just as they will have to do in the college rat race! </p>
<p>So should kids from Boston not go to Harvard? Kids from the Bay Area not go to Stanford? It’s not misleading or unethical to market to people WITH A HIGH CHANCE OF ATTENDING YOUR SCHOOL. It’s called ROI.</p>
<p>You are making a lot of specious claims and don’t seem to have even read the many thoughtful comments in this thread. </p>
<p>But you have zero evidence that they are being “shielded.” A bright kid from Montana who wants to stay in Montana as an adult might have very little reason to go far away for college. University of Montana, Carroll College, or schools in surrounding states might offer everything he or she wants. You make the assumption that people are “low-information” simply because their choices are not the same as yours.</p>
<p>@becca17: Thanks for the reference; I guess that it was published more than just a few months ago!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Exactly. If I want to live in Montana as an adult, and can get a good education in the honors program at U of MT or Carroll or wherever–and develop networks that will serve me well in that part of the country–why would I leave? Where is it stated that I HAVE to do research on hundreds of schools around the US that I have no interest in attending? </p>
<p>I have a hard time believing you work with these families, or you’d be more empathetic and a lot less judgmental. </p>
<p>Sometimes the most closed minds are the ones that purport to be open.</p>
<p>I don’t think becca is criticizing the families; I think her thesis is that the regional colleges and colluding guidance counselors are trying to persuade these families not to look outside the local area. If they are purveying false information to do this (as becca argues), that’s bad. If they are just trying to compete for desirable students, but aren’t lying, it’s not so bad.</p>
<p>I think it’s pretty obviously true that most (not all, but most) low income families also have low information when it comes to selective college admissions. That’s part of why the selective colleges have to do all this outreach in the first place.</p>
<p>I would like to see evidence of lying or collusion. So far none has been offered. </p>
<p>Agree that many poor kids don’t know about selective colleges–but again, many don’t want to go far away even if they can. The harsh judgment of those kids is what I have a problem with.</p>